- From: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 23:23:36 +0200
- To: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Bert Bos wrote: > I have an action[1] to write a response to the following: > > On Sunday 01 March 2009, Anton Prowse wrote: >> 10.8.1, 'line-height' property >> (http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#propdef-line-height) : >> >> # On a block-level, table-cell, table-caption or inline-block element >> # whose content is composed of inline-level elements, 'line-height' >> # specifies the minimal height of line boxes within the element. The >> # minimum height consists of a minimum height above the block's >> # baseline and a minimum depth below it, exactly as if each line box >> # starts with a zero-width inline box with the block's font and line >> # height properties (what TeX calls a "strut"). >> >> >> Issue 8: what is a block's baseline? This is defined for >> table-cell, but not for block, inline-block or table-caption. >> Furthermore, is the word 'block' appropriate for table-cell or >> table-caption? > > The reason an inline-block and table-cell have a baseline is because two > of them can be placed side by side and thus we need to know how to > align them. Block and list-item do not have a baseline defined, because > they don't need one. > > But this section (10.8) isn't talking about the baselines of the > elements, it is talking about the baselines of line boxes *inside* the > elements. Certainly. (My question was rhetorical, merely intended to express my dislike for the current wording.) [As I noted in [1], contrary to what I originally claimed, the baseline of an inline-block and an inline-table /is/ in fact defined in the spec, as is required. However, it occurs at the bottom of the section for 'vertical-align', whereas it should probably be moved up to the 'line-height' section being discussed.] > Here is a proposed rewrite that avoids the word "block" where it is > confusing: > > On a block-level, table-cell, table-caption or inline-block element > whose content is composed of inline-level elements, 'line-height' > specifies the minimal height of line boxes within the element. The > minimum height consists of a minimum height above the line box's > ^^^^^^^^^^ > baseline and a minimum depth below it, exactly as if each line box > starts with a zero-width inline box with the element's font and line > ^^^^^^^^^ > height properties (what TEX calls a "strut"). This change works well for me, in that it now meaningfully provides the definition of the baseline of a line box (which is absent from the text in its current form) by reference to a strut. However, it does so in a rather roundabout way, with the definition implicit in a sentence which is primarily concerned with engineering a minimum line box height through the introduction of the strut. I'm finding myself increasingly persuaded by David Baron's proposal for a "root inline box".[1] [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009May/0191.html Cheers, Anton Prowse http://dev.moonhenge.net
Received on Monday, 31 August 2009 21:25:33 UTC